“an orphanage if well run would be better, a group home if well run would be better.”
Then you agree that IF an alternative exists it would be better - which is what I said. (you have alot of “if”s in your sentence)
But IF the alternative doesn’t exist - then what ? That was Ryan’s point.
Now a previous poster argues that an alternative always exists, and if you buy that (and I’d like to) then it really doesn’t matter, because the alternative will always win out over the homosexual couple.
Obviously John O doesn’t mean an orphanage with sex perverts running on it.
ANY OPTION (leaving aside murderers, tortures and the like) is better than involving mentally ill sex perverts in anything to do with children who have no blood relatives to live with.
There have always been, are now, and will always be other options for such children than to give them to mentally ill sex perverts who have a traditional and historical attraction to children.
Homosexuals should never, ever be allowed around children - as so-called parents, teachers, advisors, counselors, pastors, priests, BIg Brothers/Sisters, nothing - nada - ever! And any parents who have a homosexual relative should keep their children away from him/her too.
ever been in foster homes or care?
I have and there is not one child who wants homosexuals to take them , see them kissing, touching each other, in bed with each other and acting as if they’re a normal family.
Boys need a man to raise them to be men not that some men can do that looking around at some pansies today, to teach tem to fight, to learn how to build , fix and work.
Boys need a mother to have that shoulder
Girls need a mother and a father, not two daddies who have no idea what that girl will go through , not two mummies and no idea what a guy is about